Mitch,
Photoshop Corey's car at the Apex (where the dark pavement is) and you'll see where I was going. :roll:
Adam...you stay quiet. :D
-=- T
Printable View
Mitch,
Photoshop Corey's car at the Apex (where the dark pavement is) and you'll see where I was going. :roll:
Adam...you stay quiet. :D
-=- T
OK ... this was the "Corey Line"
http://www.argentlab.com/nasatx/mitch/CoreyLine1.jpg
What's your point?
Corey's car is facing the wrong way, although it's track placement is correct.
uuummmm, if you would come race w/us, you would know we ran TWS CW this past time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Ginsberg
Ummm...you didn't get the joke.Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennCMC70
You know ... I would have expected more from a series director.
go away spinny, this isnt AICMCIDAHO.com :P
Seriously.Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
jb
well lower your expectations. :P
OK, I'll share ... a little ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd Covini
So why can't this "winning formula" of old work today? Consider this - the setup you mention above keeps the ride height high, with not inconsiderable body roll, lots of chasis flex, and poor camber control - which was countered with bags of static camber - this worked because with a high ride height, at least the roll center is above ground, and the body roll helped minimize the bind inherent with the 4 link - the car was reasonably easy to drive fast for a driver of average experience.
I drove Eric's old #17 on Saturday, and it pretty much fit this model - the car felt good and was easy to drive, but I doubt I could set as fast a lap time in it as I could in Adam's #5 for example? #17 would be perfect for a rookie to intemediate racer without changing a thing!
But I don't think this setup will cut it today if you want to win races - to beat those speedy highly developed GM boys, you need to lower your ride height as much as you can, stiffen the chassis as much as possible (in other words, ditch that bendy bolt in cage) stiffen the front springs way way up (and downsize that big ole front bar to compensate) - then tune the rear end to work with the front, which will still be relatively soft in the spring dept.
Yes the roll center will be below ground (and if the CMC directors wanted to change one simple rule to update the "parity" with the GMs, I suggest allowing X2 balljoints to help with this), but the stiff springs and chassis will help offset the negative effects of the low roll center plus help with camber control - but most importantly, the lower ride height now means we can go around corners faster. When tuning the suspension, focus on what the car is doing from mid corner to corner exit - what happens on the way in is somewhat less important (it's a Mustang after all, they all feel like crap on turn in!), but you need to be able to get on the gas early and not have an inherent corner exit push.
This setup may be comparitively more difficult to drive - for example, it won't be so forgiving if you miss a turn in point or turn in a little too hot - but it will reward a capable driver with constently faster times - and just as importantly, it should get out of corners closer to the torque arm equiped GMs, and because the stiffer springs enable you to reduce the static camber somewhat, you should be able to brake with them as well!